Gleb Vasilyev (priestmonk Tikhon) MSt in Theology The Russian Orthodox Church Local Council of 1917-1918 This paper

has two goals. First, I raise quite broad questions about conciliarism, the self-regulation of churches through collective, Spirit-guided deliberations at structured meetings of clergy, or clergy and laity. Second, I want to demonstrate the uniqueness of the Russian Orthodox Church Local Council of 1917-1918, and its important role in the life of both the Russian Church and the whole of society. Looking through the memoirs of the members of the Russian Orthodox Church Local Council of 1917-1918, I understood that it was a unique phenomenon in Russian history, and that we did not entirely comprehend it. Church Councils were usual in Old Russia from the Baptism of Rus to Peter the Great. However, some of the most famous of them had quite a negative influence on the life of both the Russian Church and the whole state. I mean first of all the Council of the Hundred Chapters of 1551, which is notorious for its apotheosis of Russian rites, creating in that way a canonic basis for future schismatics, and to an even greater degree The Great Moscow Council of 1666, which provoked by its anathemas a centuries-old tragedy of schism in the Russian Church.1 The failure of these councils was conditioned by many factors but to a considerable degree by the lack of theology in the Moscovite Russia Church, as well as its isolation and provinciality. In establishing a Synodal system of Church administration, Peter the Great abolished not only the Patriarchate but also the institution of Local Councils. The Russian Church had no Local Council during the whole of the synodal period although canon law requires the convocation of annual councils of bishops! This is not the case for the Russian territories of course, as there have never been such frequent councils in Russia. Nevertheless, a canonical defectiveness of the synodal system is evident. But maybe it is better not to assemble at all, than to assemble and to provoke a schism? The obvious consequence of Peter`s reforms was the ending of Russias cultural isolation. St. Petersburg was not a remote place in Europe any more, and this applied also to the field of theology. By the end of the XIX century, Russia had become more mature and thereby ready for the forthcoming Council. On the one hand, there were a great many problems to solve, and on the other, the necessary cultural and theological potential had been accumulated for their successful solution. Preparation for the Russian Church Local Council lasted for over 10 years, with some intervals. This detailed preparation can be seen in the striking scope of the problems covered by the Council, as reflected in its Acts and decrees.
1

The anathemas of the Great Moscow Council were abolished by the Russian Orthodox Church Local Council of 1970

However, the uniqueness of that Council consisted not only in the high level of preparation for it but also can be seen in the calibre of its representatives, drawn as they were from the whole Russian Church. The Council was convened and began its work at the time of a great crisis in Russia, and continued its activities to the sound of shots and to the cannonade of guns. At that horrible time, when all bodies of power and social and civil structures were destroyed, when society became a mob, only the Church showed an ideal of a creative unity in its Local Council. And this was not the fruit of human endeavor, but a gracious act of the Holy Spirit. One of the members of the Council was Metropolitan Evlogy (Georgievsky). He wrote about it as follows: Russian life in those days was a turbulent sea stirred by a revolutionary storm. Church life came into disorder. At first, the character of the Council disturbed, saddened and even seemed terrible due to the diversity of its members, their irreconcilability, the hostility of groups and desires Disunity, confusion, dissatisfaction, even mutual distrust - that was a state of the Council in the beginning. But oh, Gods miracle! Gradually everything started to change A crowd affected by revolution, touched its dark rudiments and started to regenerate itself into some harmonious whole, outwardly regulated and inwardly united. People were becoming peaceful, serious workers, they started to feel in a different way, started to look at things in a different way. This process of prayerful regeneration was evident for every attentive person, perceptible for every Council member. The spirit of peace, renewal and unanimity uplifted all of us2 During many months of work all the members of the Council participated in the Divine Liturgy every day. An amazing atmosphere of mutual respect and real Christian liberty reigned over the participants of the Council. Every member could make a report and set forth his opinion and arguments on a particular issue before voting. The debate concerning the re-establishment of the Patriarchate, for example, which was by far the most controversial subject, lasted for almost two months. Nearly ninety reports were still to be heard, when the Bolsheviks revolted, and Moscow was involved in a civil war. Interestingly enough, we learn from the memoirs of Prince Hilarion Vasilchikov about how the dilemma was resolved: The Church Council worked to the crackling of gunfire and the rattle of machineguns. I do not remember now exactly who was the first to make a statement that at that time under the circumstances, the most important and urgent issue was the re-establishment of the Patriarchate. And we had to deal with that immediately and put aside other matters. That statement was supported by many voices, but there were some academic professors who were vacillating and hesitant. And then schema-monk, the elder Fr. Aleksiy asked for the floor. He said only a few words but so simply and with such a sense of firm belief that all objections became insignificant. All the participants of the assembly were seized with an awareness of the rightness of the decision and the necessity to do what needed to be done, and the issue of re-establishment of the Patriarchate was resolved unanimously.3 As is well-known, the three most authoritative candidates were elected as a result of a multi-stage system of voting. But this was only a human act. The last and the most important
2 3

Evlogiy (Georgievsky), Metropolitan. The Path of My Life: Memoirs. Moscow, 1994, p. 273. H.Vasilchikov, Reminiscences // http://www.krotov.info/history/20/1910/1917vasi.html

moment was entrusted to the Will of God. Perhaps, it was the only time in Russian Church history when the Patriarch was elected by lot. However, this is an ancient church custom dating back to the Apostles. It is remarkable that the members of the Council expressed a very strong faith, one can say a trust in God, involving no political or other interests in their resolution of that important matter. And how they came to love their by Gods lot elected Patriarch, all church people and those who not long ago interrupted the debate about the re-establishment of Patriarchate!.. But once the Patriarch appeared at the assembly like the bright and shining sun Everyone was meeting him with such a thrill of joy! All of us, even left-wing professors, who not long ago argued with such conviction against the Patriarchate When the Patriarch arrived to the singing of the troparion and the bringing in of the Patriarch's Cross - everyone knelt. The Patriarch entered the sanctuary and came out wearing the mantle, greeted the Council, blessed us after the public prayer and then left. That visit was the highest point, to which the Council came spiritually in its first session. At that very time there were no longer formerly disagreeing and alien to each other members of the Council but there were saintly, righteous people covered by the Holy Spirit, and they were ready to fulfill His Will On that very day some of us understood the real meaning of the hymn Today the Grace of the Holy Spirit gathered us4 in such a way described Metropolitan Evlogiy his thoughts and impressions. Undoubtedly, the election of the Patriarch was the most important act of the Local Council. Reflecting on that many years later, Prince Hilarion Vasilchikov wrote in 1951, and maybe he was appealing to our time as well: Everything was crashing around; state, public and even family ties were broken, and there at the Church Council we are performing a great historical deed, we are laying the foundation of the new moral and religious revival of Russia, and restoring the Patriarchate, we are creating the center, the starting point of that revival. I still have such unyielding awareness and such firm belief as in those great days notwithstanding the hardships that the Russian Orthodox Church has gone through. These words are the words of hope in our hearts. The Russian Prince witnesses that the entire Russian life has been destroyed its state, its society and even family, but there is something nevertheless that links us with that lost Russia and that is the Russian Orthodox Church. This is the stone, which should be and is the foundation to build on. So, the state and civil tradition was interrupted in Russia after the revolt in 1917. But the Russian Church maintained its tradition. In considerable degree it was a result of creative work of the Local Council of 1917- 1918.

Evlogiy (Georgievsky), Metropolitan, Ibid, p.282.